HOLUNGER 
pH8.5 

MILL RUN F3-1543 



-7"s 



= E 423 
"^ .B47 

Copy 1 



ENTON'S ANTl-COMPROiMISE SPEECH. 

SPEECH 




MR. SeNTO.N, of MISS^R 

JN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, JUNE 10, ia>0. 

On his motion to postpone until the 4th day of March, 1851, the Bill reported from the 
C'^y Committee of Thirteen, — the Compromise Bill. 



The Senaie having under consideraiion the bill 
providing for the admission of California into the 
Union as n State, for esiablishing Territorial Gov- 
ernments for Utah and New Mexico, and making 
proposals to Texas for the settlement of her north- 
ern and western boundary — 

Mr. BENTON moved that the further consider- 
ation of the oili be postponed until the 4th day of 
March, 1851. 

The motion being stated by the Vice President, 
and declared to take precedence of all amend- 
menis — 

Mr. BENTON then addressed the President of 
the Senete, and said; 

1 make the motion which supersedes ali other 
motions, and which, itself, can only be supersed- 
ed by a motion still more .stringent — the motion to 
lie on the table. ! move the indefinite jiostpont- 
meni of this bill, and in the form required by our 
roles, which is to a day certain beyond the session; 
and, to make sure of that, 1 propose a day beyond 
the life of the present Congress. It is the proper 
motion to test the sense of the Senate on the fate 
of a measure, and to save time which might be 
lost in useless amendments. [ have wailed a 
ir.op.th for the larger amendments to be voted 
atiOT), and now deem it my duty to proceed with 
my motion, with a view to proceed with the bills 
^ingiy, if this bill, of many in one, shall be pu; 
c.;t of the way, but will withdraw it at any time 
10 admit of votes on vital points. It is a bill of 
thirty-nine sections — forty, save one — an ominous 
number; and which, with the two little bills which 
r.:tend it, is called a compromise, and is pressed 
upon us as a remedy for the national calamities. 
Now, all this labor of the committee, and all this i 
reaiedy, proceed upon the assumption that the pec- j 
pie of the United States are in a miserable, dis- i 
tracted condition; that it is their mission to relieve I 
this national distress, and that these bills are the j 
sovereign remedy for that purpose. Now, in my ! 
opinion, all this is a mistake, both as to the con- ; 
Lliiion of the country, the mission of the commit- } 
•.'.e, end the efficacy of their remedy. I do not j 
'.elieve in this misery, and distraction, and dis- i 
'.ess, and strife, of the people. On the contrary, I 
i believe them to be very quiet at home, attending 
to tneir crops, such of them as do not mean to [ 
feed out of the public crib; and that they would 
be perfectly happy if the politicians would only 
p4r-nit tbem to think so. I knov/ of no distrcRs ! 



in the country, no misery, no strife, no distrac- 
tion, none of tho.^c five gaping wounds of which 
the Senator from Kentucky made enumeration on 
the five fingers of his left liand, and for the heal- 
ing of which, all together, and all at i nee, and 
not one at a time, like the little Doctor Taylor, 
he has provided this capacious plaster in ihe 
^shape ot live old bills tacked together. I believe 
the Senator and myself are alike, in this, that each 
of us has but five fingtr.s on the left liand; and 
that may account for the limiitUion of the wounds. 
When the fingers gave out, they gave out; and if 
there had been more fingers, ihtre might have 
been more wounds — as many as fingers — and, 
toes also. 1 know nothing of all these " gaping 
wounds," nor of any distress in the country 
since we got rid of the bank of the Uni;ed 
States, and since v.-e got possession of the goid 
currency. Since that lime 1 have heard of no pe- 
cuniary or business d-istress, no rotten currency, 
no expansions and contractions, no deranged ex- 
changes, no decline of public stocks, no laborers 
begging employi'hent, no produce rotting upon the 
hands of the larmcr, no property sacrificed at 
forced sales, no loss of confidence, no three per 
centum a month interest, no call for a bankrupt act. 
Never were the people — the business-doing and 
the working peojile — as well offas they are to-day. 
As tor political distress, " U is all in my tye." it 
is all among the politicians. Never were the po- 
litical blessings of the country greater than at pres- 
ent: civil and religious liberty eminently enjoyed; 
life, liberty, and property protected; Ihe North and 
the South returning to the old belief, that they 
were made for each other; and peace and [)lcnty 
reigning throughout the land. This is the condi- 
tion of the country — happy in the extreme; and I 
listen with amazemen' to the recitals which 1 have 
heard on this floor of strife and cxintenlion, gaping 
wounds and streaming Mood, distress and misery. 
I feel mystified. The Senator from Kcntuckj', 
[Mr. Clay ] chairman of the committee, and re- 
porter of the bill, and its pathetic advocate, for- 
merly delivered us many such recitals, about the 
times that the tariff was to be increased, the na- 
tional bank charter to be renewed, the depositea 
to he restored, or a b^krupt act to be passed. He 
has been absent Pt some year.'^; and, on returning 
among us, seems to begin where he left off. He 
treats us to the old dish of distress ! Sir, it is a 
mistake. There is none of it; and if there was, 



e-4 



the remedy would be in the hands of the people — 
in the hearts of the people — who love their country, ; 
and mean to take care of it — and not in the con- 1 
trivances of politicians, who mistake their own for j 
their country's distresses. It is all a mistake. It [ 
looks to me like a joke. But when I recollect the i 
imposing number of the committee, and how " dis- i 
tinguished " they all were, and how they voted i 
themselves free from instructions, and allowed the | 
Senate to talk, but not to vote, while they were \ 
out, and how long they were deliberating: when I j 
recollect all these things, I am constrained to ] 
believe the committee are in earnest. And as for ! 
the Senator himself, the chairman of the committee, : 
the perfect gravity with which he brought forward 
his remedy — these bills and the report — the pathos | 
with which he enforced them, and the hearty con- ! 
gratulations which he addressed to the Senate, to the | 
United States, and all mankind on the appointment ; 
of his committee, preclude the idea of an inten- 1 
tional joke on his part. In view of all this, I find ■ 
mysilf compelled to consider this proceeding as I 
serious, and bound to treat it parliamentarily; i 
which 1 now proceed to do. And, in the first place, 
let us see what it is the committee has done, and 
what it is that it has presented to us as the sover- 
eign remedy for the national distempers, and which 
we are to swallow whole — in the lump — all or 
none — under the penalty of being treated by the 
organs as enemies to the country. 

Here are a parcel of old bills, which have been 
lying upon our tables for some months, and which 
might have been passed, each by itself, in some 
good form, long ago, and which have been carried 
out by the committee, and brought back again, 
bundled into one, and altered just enough to make 
each one worse; and then called a compromise — 
where there is nothing to compromise — and sup- 
ported by a report which cannot support itself. 
Here are the California State admission bill, re- 
ported by the Committee on Territories three 
months ago — the two territorial government bills, 
reported by the same committed at the same time — 
the Texas compact bill, originated by me six years 
ago, and reproduced at the present session — the 
fugitive slave recovery bill, reported from the 
judiciary committee at the commencement of the 
session — and the slave trade suppression bill for 
this District of Columbia, which is nothing but a 
revival of an old Maryland law, in force before 
the District was created, and repealed by an old 
act of Congress. These are the batch — five bills 
taken from our files, altered just enough to spoil 
each, then tacked together, and christened a com- 
promise, and pressed upon the Senate as a sover- 
eign remedy for calamities which have no existence. 
This is the presentation of the case: and now for 
the case itself. 

It is the work of a majority of the committee: 
so the report informs us: and, from the demon- 
strations on this floor, we may suppose it to have 
been as lean a majority as parliamentary proceed- 
ings ever exhibited. It is the work of a majority 
of thatcomnriitee; and seven is a majority of thir- 
teen; so that this compromise, which is to be 
swallowed whole by the Senate, is the work of 
seven Senators. And if i^ should happen to be 
that the committee was purposely composed half 
and half — six of one and half a dozen of the other — 
something like a jury de medielate linguce, first in- 
troduced jnto British law for the safety of the 



Welsh against the English — if this should bap,. . 
to be the case, and a half and half commiiiee wa3^\ 
actually appointed, with the precaution of a border 
member to give a casting vote in the case of a 
tie — then it may be, that the work, in fact, is the 
work of one member of the committee ! But that 
does not appear in the report. It says a majority, 
and, upon that basis, it is the work of seven. And 
hereby comes a new lesson in political arithme- 
tic — seven to govern the Committee of Thirteen 
I first, and the Senate of sixty afterwards. For, be 
it remembered, this batch of bills is not to be a 
law, freely made by Congress, but a coinpact, to 
; be swallowed, and swallowed whole, under the 
penaltyofparty execution and political damnation. 
I Sir, this committee has lacked a name— a distinct- 
I ive appellation; and, for want of characteristic 
distinction, is referred to numerically in the report 
' as the Committee of Thirteen. This gives them 
; an advantage in the debate. It is thirteen against 
i one — fearful odds against a solitary assailant, it 
should have another name. From its composition 
it might be called the committee de medietate; not 
ImgucE, but terrce; for it comes from different halves 
of the land, with a border member to sit between, 
who is to perform the exploit, hitherto deemed 
impossible in the fox chase, of tiding on both sides 
j of the sapling ! From the mode of its creation, it 
I might be called the free committee; for it certainly 
created itself, and freed itself, and tied up the Sen- 
ate while it was out. And from the manner m 
! which a majority of seven first govern thirteen, 
and then propose to govern the Senate, and the;-. 
the whole United States, it might be called the 
arithmetical committee; for it certainly ^eems to 
teach a new lesson in political arithmetic — the 
' lesson of the minority governing the majority — o'" 
one governing all. 

The committee has brought in five old bills, bun- 
dled into one, and requires us to pass them. Now 
i how did this committee get possession of these bill-- 
• I do not ask for the manual operation. I knoy, 
that each Senator had a copy on his table, ar.o 
might carry his copy where he pleased; but the5<:^ 
' bills were in the possession of the Senate, on its cai- 
\ endar — for discussion, but not for decision, while 
the committee was out. Two sets of resolutions 
were referred to the committee — but not these bills. 
And I now ask for the law — the parliamentary law 
1 — which enables a committee to consider bills not 
referred to it? to alter bills not in their legal power 
I or possession.' to tack bills together which the Sen- 
:, ate held separate on its calender? to reverse the or- 
|; der of bills on the calendar? to put the hindmost 
before, and the foremost behind ? to conjoin incor- 
gruities, and to conglomerate individualities? This 
j' is what I ask — for this is what the committee ha.^ 
done; and which, if a point of order was raised. 
: might subject their bundle of bills to be ruled ott 
the docket. Sir, there is a custom — a good na- 
tured one — in some of our State Legislatures. ■•) 
convert the last day of the session into a -so;- 
of legislative saturnalia — a frolic — something iik^ 
' barring out the master — in which all officers are 
I displaced, all authorities disregarded, all rute.s 
overturned, all license tolerated, and all business 
turned topsy-turvy. But then this is only done 
on the last day of the session, as a prelude to a 
i general break-up. And the sport is harmless, for 
i nothing is done; and it is relieved by adjournment, 
'iwhich immediately follows. Such license aa thia 



may be tolerated; for it is, at leant, innocent 
sport — the mere play of those "chilihon of a larger 
growth" \^hich some poet, or philosofiher, has 
supposed men to be. And it seenid to me that our 
committee has imitated thin play withoui its rea- 
son — taken the license of the saturnalia without 
its innocence — made grave work of their gay sjiort 
— produced a monster instead of a mcrry-andrew 
— and required us to worship what it is our duty 
to kill. 

I proceed to the destruction of this monster. 
The California bill is made the s.-ape-gont of all 
the sins of slavery in the United States — that Cal- 
ifornia which is innocent of all these sin.s. It is 
made the scape-goat; and as this i.s the first in- 
stan.ce of an American attempt to imitate that an- 
cient Jewish mode of expiatui;;^ national sins, I 
will read how it was done in Jerusalem, to show 
how exactly our committee have imitated that 
ancient expiatory custom. I read from an ap- 
proved volume of Jewish antiquities: 

'•The soul beiiia tied in the noitlica.'st ooriier ol ill.; courl i| 
of the teiiiplo, and lii^ lioad iKiuiid with scarlet cloth to 
signify sin ; the high priest wont lo hitn, and laid his hands ' 
on his head, and confessed over it all the iniquities of the 
children of Israel, and all iheir transyres'sions in all Mu^ir 
sins, pultins them all on the head of Uie goat, .\fter which, , 
he was siventothe pr^on appointed to lead him away, 
who, in the early ages ofthe custom, led him into the desert, 
and turned him loose to die ; but as the ijoat soraciimfis cs- , 
caped from the desert, the explauon, in such cases, was not 
considered complete ; and, to make sure of his dcaUi, the 
after-custom was to lead him lo a high rock, aboiu twelve 
miles from Jerusalem, and push him oti" of it backwards, lo 
prevent his jumping, the scarlet cloth being first torn from 
his head, in token that the sins of the people were laken ; 
away." 

This was the expiation of the scape-goat in 
ancient Jerusalem: an innocent and helpless ani- ( 
mal, loaded with sins which were not his own, j 
and made to die for oflences which he had never ; 
committed. So of California. She is innocent of 
ail the evils of slavery in the United State.s, yet 
they are all to be packed \tpon her back, and her- 
self sacrificed under the heavy load. First, Utah 
and New Mexico are piled upon her, each preg- 
nant with all the transgressions of the Wilmot 
proviso — a double load in itself— and enough, 
without further weight, to bear down California. 
Utah and New Mexico are first piled on; and the 
reason given for it by the committee is thus stated 
in their authentic report: 

" The committee recommend to the Senate the establish- 
ment of those territorial governments; and, in order more 
effectually to secure thai desirable object, they also recom 
mend that the bill for their establishment be incorporated 
in the bill for the admi.-sion of California, and that, united 
together, they both be passed." 

This is the reason given in the report; and the 
first thing that strikes me, on reading it, is its 
entire incompatibility with the reasons previously 
given for the same act. In his speech in favor of 
raising the committee, the Senator from Kentucky 
[Mr. Clky] was in favor of putiing the territories 
upon California for her own good— for the good 
of California herself— as the speedy way to get 
her into the Union, and the safe way to do it, by 
preventing an opposition to her admission which 
might otherwise defeat it altogether. This was 
his reason then, and he thus delivered it to the 
Senate. 

« He would say now to Oiose who desired the speedy 
admission of California, the shoitest and most expeditious 
way of attaining the desired object was lo include her ad- 
mission ia a bin giving governments to the t43rritoiies. He 
made this statement because he was impelled to do so from 



what had come to In.', knowledge. If her adinnuion an • 
iieparate measure be urged, iin op|K>suion in created which 
may result ni the deleal ol any bill lor her adMiisMOU." 

These are the reasons which the Senator then 
"ove for urging the conjunction of the State and 
?l,e Territories— quickest and safeHt for California: 
her iidmission the supreme object, and the conjunc- 
tion of the Territories only a incans of helping 
her along and saving her. And unfounded as 1 
deemed these reasons at the lime, and now know 
them to be, they still had the merit of giving pref 
erence where it was due— to the Bupcnor object- 
to California herself, a State, without being a SlaU- 
of the Union, and ."uflering all the ilia of tha: 
anomalous condition. California was then lh<- 
superior object; the Territories were incidenta 
figures and subordinate considerations, to be mad- 
subservient lo her salvation. Now all this is re 
versed. The Territories take the superior place 
They become the object: the Stale the incident 
They take the first— she the second place! And 
to make sure of their welfare — make more certain 
of »iving governments to them — inuendo, such 
governments as the committee prescribe— the con- 
junction is now proposed and enforced. This is a 
change of position, with a corresponding change 
of reasons. Doubtless the Senator from Kentucky 
i has a right to change his own position, and to 
' change his reasons at the same time; but he haa 
no right to ask other Senators to change with him, 
or to°require them to believe in two sets of reasons, 
each contradictory to the other.' It is my fortune 
to believe in neither. 1 did not believe in the first 
set when they were delivered; and time has shown 

*"Mr. Clav. Well, if the proposition be to refe.- tbe 
President's message to the Committee on the Territories, 1 
shall wiUi great pleasure vote for the proposiuon. But I do 
not think it would be right to embr.ice, in a general motion, 
the que..:tion of the admission of California, and all the other 
subjects which are treated of by the resolutions upon the 
table— the subject, for example, of the establishment of ter- 
ritorial governmenls, the subject of the establishment of a 
honndary line for Te.\as, and the proposition to compensate 
Texas for the surrender of territory. I say, sir, I do noc 
think it would be right to confound or to combine all these 
subjects, and to throw them before one committee to be 
acted upon together. I think the subject of the admission 
of I'aliforniaought to be kept separate and distinct ; although, 
for one, I should have no objection— that question being 
separated from the residue of ilie subject— that the resolu- 
tions and the rest of tlie propositions that are before the 
Senate, so far as re:!:irds those whicli have a kindred or 
common nature, should be referred, at the proper time, to 3 
committee, to be acted upon together; but I think the time 
hus not vet arrived for such a reference. Sir, there are three 

. or four inembers of Congress who have come here all the 
way fiom the Pacific, with a consiitution purporting to be 
tiie constitution of a State which is seeking to be admitted 
as a meiiiber of this Union. Now, sir, is it right to subject 

I thoin to all the delay, the uncertainty, the procrastination, 

I which must inevitably result from the combination of all these 
subjects, and a reference of them to one committee, and to 

' wait until that committee shali have adjudged the whole .^ 
1 think not. I am not now arguing whether Califorma 
ought, or ought noi to be admitted— whether she ought, or 
ought not to be admitted with the boundary which she pro- 
poses, or with any other boundary— but I am contending that, 
I considering the circumstances under which her representa- 
tion presents itself to Congress, under the circumstance 
that when thev left their homes, perhaps nothing on earth 
wiis further from their expectation than that there would be 

t the slightest impediment or ol)st.icle to their admission ; and 
in consideration of the condition in which Uiesc gentlemen 
are placed who are here in attendance, in ihe lobbies of 
these halls, it seems to me that we should decide, and de- 
cide as prompllv as we can, consistenUy with just and 
proper deliberation. I think the question of the admission 
. of California is one which stands by itself, and (hai it should 
be kept disconnected wuli the other resolutions."— ifr 

,, ClayU Sptech in Feirruart). 



that I was right. Time has disposed of the argu- 
ment of speed. That reason has expired under 
the lapse of time. Instead of more speedy, we 
ail now know that California has been delayed 
three months, wailing for this conjunction: instead 
of defeat if she remained single, we all know now 
that she might have been passed singly before the 
committee was raised, if the Senator from Ken- 
tucky had remained on his original ground, on my 
side; and every one knows that the only danger 
to California now comes from the companionship 
into which she has been forced. I do not believe 
in either set of reasons. I do not admit the terri- 
torial governments to be objects of superior in- 
terest to the admission of California. I admit 
them to be objects of interest, demanding our 
attention, and that at this session; but not at the 
expense of California, nor in precedence of her, 
nor in conjunction with her, nor as a condition 
for her admission. She has been delayed long, 
and is now endangered by this attempt to couple 
with her the Territories, with which she has no 
connection, and to involve her in the Wilmot pro- 
viso question, from which she is free. The Sena- 
tor from Kentucky has done me the favor to blame 
me for this delay. He may blame me again when 
he beholds the catastrophe of his attempted con- 
junctions; but all mankind will see that the delay 
is the result of his own abandonment of the posi- 
tion which he originally took with me. The 
other reason which the Senator gave in his speech 
for the conjunction is not repeated in the report — 
the one which addressed itself to our nervous 
system, and menaced total defeat to California if 
Brged in a bill by herself. He has not renewed 
that argument to our fears, so portentously ex- 
hibited three months ago; and it may be supposed 
that that danger has passed by, and that Congress 
is now free. But California is not bettered by it, 
but worsted. Then it was only necessary to her 
salvation that she should be joined to the Territo- 
ries; so said the speech. Now she is joined to 
Texas also; and must be damned if not strons; 
enough to save Texas, and Utah, and New Mexi- 
co, and herself into the bargain ! 

United together, the report says, the bills will 
be passed together. That is very well for the re- 
port. It was natural for it to say so. But, sup- 
pose they are rejected together, and in consequence 
of being together: what is, then, the condition of 
California? First, she has been dele.yed three 
months, at great damage to herself, waiting the in- 
trusive companionship of this incongruous com- 
pany. Then she is sunk under its weight. Who, 
ihen, is to blame — the Senator from Kentucky or 
the Senator from Missouri: And if opposition to 
this indefinite postponement shall make still further 
delay to California, and involve her defeat in the 
end, who then is to be blamed again ? 1 do not 
ask these questions of the Senator from Kentucky. 
it might be unlawful to do so: for, by the law of 
the land, no man is bound to criminate himself. 

Mr. CLAY, (from his .seat.) I do not claim 
the benefit of the law. 

Mr. BENTON. No; a high-spirited man will 
not claim it. But the law gives him the privilege; 
and, as a law-abiding and generous man, 1 give him 
the benefit of the law whether he claims it or not. 
But I think it is time for him to begin to consider 
the responsibility he has incurred in quitting his 
position at my side for California single, and first, 



I to jumble her up in this crowd, where she is ^ure 
i to meet death, come the vote when it will. I think 
i it is time for him to begin to think about submitting 
to a mis-trial ! withdraw a juror, and let a venire 
.\ facias de novo be issued. 

But I have another objection to this new argu- 
ment. The territorial government bills are now 
: the object; and to make more certain of these bills 
I! they are put into the California bill, to be carried 
safe through by it. This is the argument of the 
report; and it is a plain declaration that one meas- 
ure is to be forced to carry the other. This is a 
:, breach of parliamentary law — that law upon the 
i; existence of which the Senator from Kentucky 
took an issue with me, and failed to maintain his 
side of it. True, he made a show of maintaining 
it — ostentatiously borrowing a couple of my books 
:! from me, in open Senate, to prove his side of the 
i case; and taking good care not to open them, be- 
i cause he knew they would prove my side of it. 
Then he quoted that bill for the "relief of John 
Thompson, and for other purposes," the reading 
i of which had such an effect upon the risible sus- 
ceptibilities of that part of our spectators which 
Shakspeare measures by the quantity, and quaii- 
j| fies as barren ! Sir, if the Senator from Kentucky 
had only read us Dr. Franklin's story of John 
, Thompson and his hat-sign, it would have been 
' something — a thing equally pertinent as argument, 
, and still more amusmg as anecdote. The Sena- 
|i tor, by doing that much, admitted his obligation to 
ji maintain his side of the issue: by doing no more, he 
'I confessed he could not. And now the illegality of 
ij this conjunction stands confessed, with the super- 
'; addition of an avowed condemnable motive for it. 
;i The motive is — so declared in the report — to force 
I one measure to carry the other — the identical thing 
! mentioned in all the books as the very reason why 
j subjects of different natures should not be tacked 
|j together. I do not repeat what I have hereofore 
j said on this point: it will be remembered by the 
i Senate: and its validity is now admitted by the 
■ attempt, and the failure, to contest it. It is com- 
pulsory legislation, and a flagrant breach of par- 
liamentary law, and of safe legislation. It is also 
a compliment of no equivocal character to a por- 
tion of the members of this Chamber. To put two 
measures together for the avowed purpose of 
forcing one to carry the other, is to propose to 
force the friends of the stronger measure to take 
the weak one, under the penalty of losing the 
stronger. It implies both that these members 
cannot be trusted to vote fairly upon one of the 
measures, or that an unfair vote is wanted from 
them; and that they are coercible, and ought to be 
coerced. This is the compliment which the com- 
pulsory process implies, and which is as good as 
declared in this case. !t is a rough cornpliment, 
but such a one as "distinguished Senators" — such 
as composed this committee — may have the pre- 
rogative to ofier to the undistinguished ones: bu: 
then these undistinguished may have the privilege 
to refuse to receive it — may refuse to sanction the 
implication, by refusing to vote as required — may 
take t!ie high ground that they are not coercible, 
that they ovi-e allegiance, not to the committee, 
but to honor and duty, and that they can trust 
themselves for an honest vote, in a bill by itself, 
although the committee cannot trust them ! But, 
stop I Is it a government or the government 
which the committee propose to .secure by coer- 



eion ? Is it a government, such as a majority of 
the Senate may agree upon? or is it //le govern- 
ment, sucli as a majority of the committre liavc 
prescribed r If the f'ormcr, wiiy not leave the Sen- 
ate to free voting in a separate bill ? if the latter, 
will the Senate be coerced r will it allow a majority 
of the committee to govern the Senate? — seven to 



This is the compensation proposed to California. 
She is to rejoice, and he highly gruiififd. She is 
to contribute to the (ranqiiiility and happinea.i of the 
i;rcat family of Slates, mid thereby bi-come tran- 
quil and happy hersell'. And she is one day, it is 
hoped, to become a distinguished meml)er of this 
Confederacy. This is to be her compensation — 



govern sixty? Sir ! it is the latter — so avowed; felicity and glorv ! Prospective felicity, and con- 

and being the first instance of such an avowal, it tingenl glory. The felicity rural — rural felicity — 

should meet a reception which would make it the I from the geographical position of California — the 

last. most innocent and invigorating kind of felicity. 

Mr. President: all the evils of incongruous con- The glory and distinction yet to be achieved, 

junctions are exemplified in this conjunction of the Whether California will consider these anticipa- 

territorial government bills with the California tions ample compensation for all the injuries of this 

State admission bill. They are subjects not only conjunction — the long delay, and eventual danger, 

foreign to each other, but involving different ques- and all her sufferings at home, in the mean time— 

tions, and resting upon principles of different na- will remain for herself to say. For my part, 1 

tures. One involves the slavery and anti-slavery ! would not give one hour's duration of actual exist- 

questions: the other is free from them. One in- cnce in this Union for a whole eternity of such 



volves constitutional que.stions: the other does not. 
One is a question of right, resting upon the Con- \ 
stitution of the United States and the treaty with 
Mexico: the otiier is a queslinu of expediency, 
resting in the discretion of Congress. One is the 
case of a State, asking for an equality of rights | 
with the other States: the other is a question of 
territories, asking protection from States. One is 
a sovereignty — the other a property. So that, at , 
all points, and under every aspect, the subjects 
differ; and it is well known that there are Senators 
here who can unite in a vote for the admission of 
California, who cannot unite in any vote for the 



compensation; and such, I think, will be the opin- 
ion of California herself. Life, and present relief 
from actual ills, is what she wants. Existence 
and relief, is her cry ! And for these she can find 
no compensation in the illusions of contributing to 
the tranquillity of States which are already tran- 
quil, the happiness of people who are already 
happy, the settlement of questions in which she has 
no concern, and the formation of compromises 
which breed new quarrels in assuming to settle 
old ones. 

With these fine reasons for tacking Utah and 
New Mexico to California, the committee proceed 
to pile a new load upon her back. Texas next 



territorial governments; and that, because these 

governments involve the slavery questions, from \\ appears in the committee's plan, crammed mio the 
all which the California bill is free. That is the '! California bill, with all her questions of debt and 
rock on which men and parties split here. Some ij boundary, dispute with New Mexico, division into 
deny the power of Cogress in toto over the subject J future States, cession of territory to the United 
of slavery in territories: such as they can support ; States, amount of compensation to be given her, 
no bill which touches that question, one way or I thrust in along with her! A compact with one 
the other. Others admit the power, but deny the ' State put into a law for the life of another ! And 



expediency of its exercise. Others again claim 
both the power and the exercise. Others again 
are under legislative instructions — some to vote 
one way, some the other. Finally, there are some 
opposed to giving any governments at all to these 
Territories, and in favor of leaving them to grow 
up of themselves into future States. Now, what 
are the Senators, so circumstanced, to do with 
these bills conjoined? Vole for all — and call it a 
compromise! as if oaths, duty, constitutional ob- 
ligation, and legislative instructions, were subjects 
of compromise. No ! rejection of the whole is the 
only course; and to begin anew, each bill by itself, 
the only remedy 



a veto upon the admission of California given to 
Texas ! This is a monstrosity of wiich there is 
no example in the history of our legislation, and 
for the production of which it is fair to permit the 
committee to speak for themselves. They say: 

"A majorilv of the Lomniittee recommend to the Senate 
that lite section containing these proposals to Texas shall be 
incorporatfd into the bill embracing the admission of CaJi- 
fornia as a State, and the establishment of tirritorial aoveru- 
inents for Utah' and \ew Mexico. The definition and 
establishment of the bouii'iary bnween New Mexico and 
Texas has an intimate and necessary connection with the 
establishment of a territorial government for New Mexico. 
To form a territorial ijovernment for New .Mexico, without 
prescribini the limits of the K-rritory, would leave the work 
imperfect 'and incomplete, and miaht expose New Mexico 



Thp rnniiincrjnn nf tliP<!P liilh illiistratpq all the '' t<» '^erious oontrov.^rsy, ifnot dangerous collisions, with the 
ine conjuncuon ot these mil* iiiustiaies an tne g^_^^^ ^^^ 'i\-xti:^. And mo-t. if noi all. Uie considerations 
lis of )Oining incoherent subjects to2;ether. It ' ,y,,n.,, „„ityi„ ^a^.^r of 



presents a revolting enormity, of whicli all the 
evils go to an innocent party, which has done all 
in its power to avoid them. But, not to do the 
Committee of Thirteen injustice, I must tell that 
they have looked somewhat to the interest of Cal- 
ifornia in this conjunction, and proposed a com- 
pensating advantage to her: of which kind consid- 
eration they are entitled to the credit in their own 
words. This, then, is what they propose for her: 
"As for t;alifori\ia— fax from feelina her sensibility af- 
fected bv her being associated with other kindred measures 
— slie ought to rejoice and be hishly gratified that, in enter- 



combininz the hill for the admission 

of California as a Stale and the tertitorial bills, apply to Uie 

boundary question of Texas. By ilie union ot the three 

measures, everv question of dirticulty and division which 

lias arisen out of the territorial acquisitions from Mexico 

I will, it is hoped, l)P adjusted, or placed in a train of satislac- 

' tory adjusimeni. The conimiiler , availing theniselves of 

the arduous and valuable labors of the Committee on Ter- 

; ritnries, report a bill, herewith annexed, (marked A,) era- 

I bracing those three measures, tin- passage of which, unilios 

' them together, they recommend to the Senate." 

These are the reasons of the committee, and 
they present grave errors in law, both constitutional 
■ pal, and of seography and history. 



-.,... .and munici, , - , . . .- 

ma into tiie Union, she may havc'contributed to the tran- I They assume a controversy between New Mexico 
quilliiy and happinessofthegreatfanulyof States,o|\vhjch ^: j^i^j Texas. No such thing. New Mexico be- 

ioncs to the United States, and the controversy te 



it is tti be hoped she may one" day he a distinsiiished mem- 



ber, 



6 



with the United Statee. They assume ihere is no 
way to settle this controversy but by a compact 
with Texas. Thisisanother great mistake. There 
are three ways to settle it: first, and best, by a 
compact; secondly, by a suit in the Supreme Court 
of the United States; thirdly, by giving a govern- 
ment to New Mexico according to her actual ex- 
tent when the United States acquired her, and 
holding on to that until the question of title is de- 
cided, either amicably by compact, or legally by 
the Supreme Court. The fundamental error of 
liie committee is in supposing that New Mexico is 
r/arty to this controversy with Texas. No such 
:ning. New Mexico is only the John Doe of the 
:oncern. That error corrected, and all the reason- 
;ng of the committee falls to the ground. For the 
judicial power of the United States extends to all 
controversies to which the United Stales are party; 
and the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court 
extends to all cases to which a State is a party. 
This brings the case bang up at once within the 
jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, without waiting 
for the consent of Texas, or waiting for New Mex- 
ico to grow up into a State, so as to have a suit 
between two States; and so there is no danger 
of collision, as the committee suppose, and make 
£Q argument for their bill, in the danger there 
is to New Mexico from this apprehended collision. 
If any takes place, it will be a collision with tlie 
United States to whom the territory of New Mex- 
ico belongs; and she will know how to'\:)revent this 
collision, first, by offering what is not only just, 
out generous, to Texas; and next in defending her 
territory from invasion, and her people from vio- 
lence. 

These are the reasons for thrusting Texas, with 
all her multifarious questions, into the California 
bill; and, reduced to their essence, they argue 
thus: Utah must go in, because she binds upon 
California; New Mexico must go in, because she 
binds upon Utah; and Texas must go in, because 
she binds upon New Mexico And thus poor 
California is crammed and gorged until she is about 
n the condition that Jonah would have been in, 
f he had swallowed the v/hale, instead of the 
whaJe swallowing him. This opens a new chap- 
ter in legislative ratiocination. It substitutes con- 
tiguity of territory for congruity of matter, and 
makes geosraphical affinities the rule of legislative 
conjunctions. Upon that principle the committee 
night have gone on, cramming other bills into the 
California idll, all over the United States; for all 
o.;r territory is binding in some one ]iarl upon 
j.'.other. Upon that principle, the District of Co- 
umbia .slave trade suppression bill might have 
been interjected; for, though not actually binding 
^pon Texas, yet it binds upon land that binds 
,.pon land that does bind upon her. So of the 
''agitive slave bill. For, let the fugacious slave 
run as far as he may. he must .still be on land; and, 
that being the case, the territorial contiguity may 
be established whicli jusiifies the legislative con- 
'unction. 

Mr. President, the moralist informs us, that 
there are some subjects too light for reason — too 
grave for ridicule; and in such cases, the mere 
moralist may laugh or cry, as he deems best. But 
not 90 with the legislator — his business is not 
laughing or crying. Whimpering, or simpering, 
ie not his mission. Work is his vocation, and 
gravity his vein; and in that vein I proceed to con- 



. sider this interjection of Texas, with all her multi- 

' farious questions, into the bowels of the California 
bill. ^ 

J In the first place, this Texas bill is a compact, 
depending for its validity on the consent of Texas, 
and is put into the California bill as part of a com- 
promise and general settlement of all the slavery 
questions; and, of course, the whole must stand 
together, or fall together. This gives Texas a 
veto upon the admission of California. This is 
unconstitutional, as well as unjust; for, by the 
Constitution, new States are to be admitted by 
Congress, and not by another State; and, there- 
fore, Texas should not have a veto upon the ad- 
mission of California. In the next place, Texas 
presents a great many serious questions of her 
own — some of them depending upon a compact 
already existing with the United States, many of 
them concerning the United States, one concern- 
ing New Mexico, but no one reaching to Califor- 
nia. She has a question of boundary nominally 
with New Mexico, in reality with the United States, 
as the owner of New Mexico; and that might be a 
reason for joining her in a bill, so far as that boun- 
dary is concerned, with New Mexico; but it can be 
no reason for joining her to California. The western 
boundary of Texas is the point of collision with 
New Mexico; and this plan of the committee, in- 
stead of proposing a suitable boundary between 
them, adapted to localities, or leaving to each its 
actual possessions, disturbing no interest, until the 
decision of title upon the universal principle of 
uti possidetis; instead of these obvious and natural 

i remedies, the plan of the committee cuts deep into 

] the actual possessions of the United States in New 
Mexico — rousing the question which the commit- 
tee professes to avoid, the question of extending 
slavery, and so disturbing the whole United States. 
And here I must insist on the error of the com- 
mittee in constitutional and municipal law, before 

. I point out their mistakes in geography and his- 
tory. They treat New Mexico as having a con- 
troversy with Texas — as being in danger of a col- 
lision with her — and that a compact with Texas to 
settle the boundary between them is the only way 
to settle that controversy and prevent that collision. 
Now, all this is a mistake. The controversy is 
not v/ith New Mexico, but with the United States, 
and the judicial power of the United States has 
jurisdiction of it. xAgain, possession is title until 
the right is tried; and the United States having the 

' possession, may give a government at once accord- 

! in? to the possession; and then wait the decision 
of title. 

I avoid all argument about right — the eventual 
right of Texas to any part of what was New Mex- 
ico before the existence of Texas. I avoid that 

'• question. Amicable settlement of contested claim, 
and not adjudication of title, is now my object. I 
need no argument from any quarter to satisfy me 
that the Texas questions ought to be settled. I 
happened to know that before Texas was annexed, 
and brought m bills and made speeches for that 
purpose, at that time. I brought in such bills six 
years ago, and again at the present session; and 
whenever presented single, either by myself or any 

- other per.son, 1 shall be ready to give it a generou.g 
consideration; but, as part of the California bill, f 

! wash my hands of it. 

|j I am against disturbing actual possession, either 

' that of New Mexico or of Texas; and, therefore, 



a:n in favor of leaving to each all iis populaiion, 
and an ample amount of compact and homoe;e- 
neous territory. With this view, all my hills and 
plans for a divisional line between New Mexico 
and Texas — whether of lb44 or 1850— left to 
each all its settlements, all its actual |)()S3ecisions, 
all its uncontested claim; and divided the re- 
mainder by a line adapted to the K;eo^raphy and 
natural divisions of the country, as well as suitable 
lo the political and social condition of the people 
themselves. This sjave a longitudinal line between 
them; and the longitude of 100 degrees in my bill 
of 1844, and 102 degrees in my bill of 1850 — and 
both upon the same principle of leaving possessions 
intact, Texas having extended her settlements in 
the mean time. The proposed line of the commit- 
tee violates all these conditions. It cuts deep 
and arbitrarily into the actual possessions of New 
Mexico, such as she held them before Texas had 
existence; and so conforms to no principle of pub- ^ 
lie policy, private right, territorial affinity, or local 
propriety. It begins on the Rio del None, twenty 
miles in a straight line above El Paso, and thence, 
diagonally and northeastwardly, to the point 
wnere the Red river crosses the longitude of 100°. 
Now, this beginning, twenty miles above El 
Paso, is about three hundred miles in a straight j 
line (near six hundred by the windings of the i 
river) ai)ove the ancient line of New Mexico; and ! 
this diagonal line to the Red river cuts about four 
hundred miles in a straight line through the ancient 
New Mexican possessions, cutting otl' about sev- 
enty thousand square miles of territory from New 
Mexico, where there is no slavery, and giving it 
to Texas, where there is. This constitutes a more 
serious case of tacking than even that of sticking 
incongruous bills together, and calls for a most 
considerate examination of all the circumstances 
it involves. I will examine these circumstances, 
first making a statement, and then sustaining it by 
proof. 

El Paso, above which the Texas boundary is 
now proposed to be placed by the committee, is one 
of the most ancient of the New Mexican towns, 
and to which the Spaniards of New Mexico re- 
treated in the great Indian revolt in 1680, and made 
their stand, and thence recovered the whole prov- 
ince. It was the residence of the lieutenant gov- 
ernor of New Mexico, and the most southern 
town of the province, as Taos was the most north- 
ern. Being on the right bank of the river, the 
dividing line between the United States and the 
Republic of Mexico leaves it out of our limits, and 
consequently out of the present limits of New 
Mexico; but New Mexico still extends to the Rio 
del Norte at the Paso; and therefore this beginning 
line proposed by the committee cuts into the 
ancient possession of New Mexico — a possession 
dating from the year 1595. That line, in its course 
10 the Red river, cuts the river and valley of the 
Puerco (called Pecos in the upper part) into two 
parts, leaving the lower and larger part to Texas; 
the said Rio Puerco and its valley, from head lo 
inouih, having always been a part of New Mexico, 
and now in its actual possession. Putting together 
what is cut from the Puerco, and from the Del 
Norte above and below El Paso, and it would 
amount to about seventy thousand square miles, 
to oe taken by the committee's line from its pres- 
ent and ancient possessor and transferred to a new 
ciaims'it. This is what the new line would do, and 



in doing it would raise the question of the exten- 
sion of slavery, and of its existence at this time, 
by law, in yevj Mexico as a part of Texas. 

This statement is too importimi to remain a mere 
.statement. I therefore proceed lo verify il; and 
for that purpo.se have recourse to ihe highest au- 
thorities — Humboldt's Essay upon New Spain, 
Pike's Journal of his passage through New iVIex- 
ico, and Dr. Winlizenu-s's report of his tour with 
Doniphan '.-) expedaion. 1 liegin wiih liuniiioldt, 
and quote him to show the Ijounduries of New 
Mexico on the ea."!, where that province bounded 
upon Texas and CoahuHa. At page 282, vol. 1, 
Paris edition of the Es.-»tiy, he says: 

" J'ai tracf^ les liiiiiieK de Ooaliuil.i el de Texa'', pre.s cle 
reiiiboiieliure dii Rio I'uerco, el vers les sdurceH du Rio de 
Sua Siiha, lellcs que j(; Ics ni irouvtus indi(|iU<.-rt dims le.t 
cartes spiciales coiiserv*<;8 daiis les arciiives de la vice- 
roynuie, el drussies par des ing^iiieurs au service du roi 
d'Espagne." 

In E.Nunsii : " 1 have traced the IliiiiUs of (Joaliuila and 
of Texas near Ihenioulli of the Rio Puerco, and towards the 
source!; of the Rio do San Saba, such a.- I have found lliein 
in the speeial mapr^ preserved in ihe archives of the vice- 
royaUy, and drawn up by engineers in tlie service of Ihe 
King of Spain." 

This is what Humboldt says of the eastern 

boundary of New Mexico; and his map illustrates 

I what he says. He places that boundary, as it 

I leaves the Rio Grande del Norte, at about twelve 

' miles beloA? the mouth of the Puerco, in west lon- 

' gitude 104, and in north latitude 29|, and thence 

northeastwardly to the head of the Rio San Saba, 

j a branch of the Rio Colorado of Texas, in north 

i latitude 32° 15', and in west longitude 101. This 

is the line he gives as found in the special maps 

I drawn up by engineers in the service of the King 

I of Spain, and preserved in the archives of the 

vice-royalty in the city of Mexico. Further than 

: that he does not trace it, because the country was 

j wild and unoccupied except by roving Indians; 

butthat is far enough for our purpose. It is enough 

to show that New Mexico, und'M' the Spanish 

government, extended as far east as 101 degrees 

I of longitude, covering the whol-.^ course of the 

'. Puerco, and entering what is now the county of 

Bexar, in Texas. So much for Humboldt: now 

for Pike. He says, at p. 5 of his appendix to the 

journalof his journey through New Mexico: 

" New Mexico lies between 30° 'JO and 44° of north laii- 
lude, and 10-} and 108 degrees of west lo.igitude, and is tlie 
most northern province of the kingdom of New Spain. It 
I'Xtends northwesl into an undefined boundary — is bounded 
I north and east by Louisiana, south by New Biscay and Coa- 
I huila, and west by .Sonora and California. Its length is un- 
known: its breadU) may be 600 miles ; but the inhabited pan 
is not more than 400 miles in lenglli and 50 in breadth, lying 
l along the river del Norte from the 37° to ilu- 31° 31) of north 
' laUtude : but in this space there is a desert of more than -250 
I miles. Santi F6 is the capital, and the residence of the 
; governor. El Paso is the second eily, and i-; the residence 
[ of th<' lientenanl-g.ivernor. It is the most southern town 
of the province, as Taos is the most northern." 

Tnis is the journal of Pike, and his map corre- 
sponds with it. It shows the eastern boundary of 
New Mexico, leaving the Del Norte a few miles 
' below the mouth of the Puerco, in longitude 104, 
' and bearing northeast towards the San Saba. This 
corresponds with Humljoldt, and shows that, in 
.■laming 104 as ihe eastern longitudinal limit of 
j New Mexico, he was only speaking of the point 
j at which it left the Rio del .\orte, called in that 
j part the Rio Grande. His map — the breadth of 
I the province, stated by him at six hundred miles — 
! and the boundary easr on Louisiana — all show that 



8 



he carried the eastern boundary, after ieavine; the 
Del Norte, as far northeast a.* Hunfiboldt had done. 
This is the testimony of P;ke, then a lieutei;ant, 
afterwards a general in the army of the United 
States, an enerffetic explorer as well as a. brave 
officer, and much addicted to geographical study. 
He had explored the head- waters of the Missis- 
sippi and the Arkansas, and then traversed New 
Mexico and the contiguous provinces to Chihua- 
hua, and thence to Texas, as a prisoner in the 
hands of Spanish officers, and improved the occa- 
sion to learn the seography and lustory of the 
country through which he was led, and gave us 
the earliest American account of the internal pro- 
vinces of New Spain. 

Dr. Wislizenus, a scientific traveler, and one of 
the latest in the (former) internal provinces, con- 
firms both Humboldt and Pike. In his journal of 
'46- '47, he says: 

" Under the Spanisli government, Te.vas, with Coahuila, 
New Santander, and New Leon, belonged to the general 
conimandancia of the provincias internas orientales. This 
division was made in 1807. In 1834, wh»'n nineteen inde- 
pendent States and some territories formed themselves into 
the present Republic of Mexico, New Leon and New 
Santander, became two of those States, the latter havine 
changed it* name into Tamaulipas,anri Coahuila and Texas 
united formed a third Stale. The boundaries of those States 
coiitintied to he the same as under the Spanish soi-ernment. 
All the authorities which I had an opportunity to compare, 
in regard to the then southern boundary of Texas, seem to 
agree in a line along the Nueces ; but the respective bound- 
ary between Coahuila and Texas appears to have been 
somewhat indefinite from the earliest settlements. Hum- 
boldt, in his Essay Politique sur le royaume de la Nouveile 
Espagne, v. i, p. 282, says : " J 'ai trac6 les limites de Coa- 
huila etde Texas prfes del 'embouchure du Rio Puercoet vers 
les sources du Rio de San Saba, telles que je les ai tiouv^es 
indiqu6s dans les cartes sp^ciales conserv^es dans les ar- 
chives de la vice-royaut^, et dress^es par des ing^nieurs au 
service du roi d'Espagne. Mais commen' determiner des 
limites territoriales dans des savannes immenses oil les 
m^tairies sont eloign^es les unes des auires de 15 4 20 
lieues, etoii I'on ne trouve presque aucune trace de d^- 
fricheraent ou de culture." 

A late German work on Mexico by Muehlenpfordt, pub- 
lished in 1844, contains the following comment upon the 
same subject: "The boundaries of "the present State of 
Coahuila towards Texas in the' north and northeast are 
rather indefinite, but we presume that towards the north 
the boundary of the State of Coahuila extends from the 
mouth of the Rio Puerco to the small lake of San Saba, near 
the 32° north latitude." And in another place the same 
author says of the State of Taraaulipas: "The Slate, form- 
erly called the colony of New Santander, and belonging to 
the intendance of San Luis Potosi,but since the revolution 
of Mexico an independent State, is bound on the north bv 
the Slate of Coahuila and the present Republic of Texas, 
and on the east by the gulf of Mexico, from the Laguna de 
Tampico to the Nueces river, or from the 29° to the 28° 
north latitude." 

In the " Ensayo estadistico sobre el Estado de Chihua- 
hua," published in Chihuahua, 1842, I find (p. 10) the fol- 
lowing passage : 

" El Rio de Pecos forma la linea divisoria del Estado con 
el de Coahuila y Tejas.desde los32° 3(V latitud norte.hasta 
se desemboque en el Rio Grande del Norte." 

"The Pecos river forms the dividing line between the 
Stale of Chihuahua and that of Coahuila and Texas, from 
32° 30' north latitude, down to its mouth, into the Rio 
Grande." 

The Pecos and the Puerco, it will be remem- 1 
bered, are the same river, called, at its sources, 
after the name of the Indian tribe who lived upon 
them, and in its lower part Puerco, from the color 
of its waters, muddy. AU authorities agree that 
this river was, and is, in New Mexico. 

The map of Dr. Wislizeiius, which I now pro- ; 
duce, agrees with HuMboldi and Pike, except in ■ 
the correction of slight differences in longitudes 3.-:>\ 
atitudes, which his accurate instruments enabled 



him to make, and which have no practical con- 
sequence in thi.s examination. On this m.ip I 
have marked, in a red pencil line, the southeastern 
boundary of New Mexico as it existed under the 
Spanish Government, and in a dotted red pencil 
line the new boundary as proposed by our Con;- 
mittee of Thirteen. The difference between the 
two lines is, as I have stated, about seventy thou- 
sand square miles; and to that extent is New 
Mexico to be affected by that proposed line. 

To avoid all misconception, ! repeat what I have 
already declared, that I am not occupying; myself 
with the question of title as it may exist and be 
eventually determined betv/een New Mexico and 
Texas; nor am I questioning the power of Con- 
gress to establish any line it pleases in that quar- 
ter for the State of Texas, with the consent of the 
State, and any one it pleases for the Territory of 
New Mexico without her consent. I ain not occu- 
pying myself with the questions of title or power, 
but with the question of possession only — and 
how far the possession of New Mexico is to be 
disturbed, if disturbed at all, by the committee's 
line; and the effect of that disturbance in rousing 
the slavery question in that quarter. In tliat point 
of view the fact of possession is everything: for 
the possessor has a right to what he holds until 
the question of title is decided — by law, in a ques- 
tion between individuals or communities in a land 
of law and order — or by tiegotiation or arms be- 
tween independent Powers. I use the phrase, pos- 
; session by New Mexico; but it is only for brevity, 
I and to give locality to the term possession. New 
I Mexico possesses no territory; she is a territory, 
j and belongs to the United States; and the United 
States own her as she stood on the day of the 
treaty of peace and cession between the United 
States and the Republic of Mexico; asid it is into 
; that possession that I inquire, and all which I 
assert that the United States have a right to hold 
until the question of title is decided. And to save 
inquiry or doubt, and to show that the comnuttee 
are totally mistaken in law in assuming the consent 
of Texas to be indispensable to the settlement of 
the title, 1 say there are three ways to settle it, the 
first and best by cotnpact, as I proposed before 
Texas was annexed, and again by a bill of this 
year: next by a suit in the Supreme Court under 
that clause in the Constitution which extends the 
judicial power of the United States to ail contro- 
versies to which the United States is a party, and 
that other clause which gives the Supreme Court 
original jurisdiction of all cases to svhich a State 
is a party: the third way is for the United States 
to give a government to New Mexico according to 
the territory she possessed when she was ceded to 
the United States. These are the three ways to 
settle the question — one of them totally dependent 
on the will of Texas — one totally independent of 
her will — and one independent of her will uwtil she 
chooses to go into court. As to anything that 
Texas or New Mexico may do in taking or relin- 
quishing possession, it is all moonshine. New 
Mexico is a territory of the United States. She 
is the property of the United States; and she can- 
not dispose of herself, or any part of herself; nor 
can Texas take her, or any part of her. She is to 
stand as she did the day the United States acquired 
her; and to that point all my examinations are 
directed. 
And '.H that point of view it is immaterial wha*' 



are the boundaries of New Mexico. The whole | 
of the territory obtained from Mexico, and not 
ri?iitfully l)eloiigin£; to a State, beloiiijs to the 
United States; and, as such, is the property of the 
United States, and to be auended to accordingly. \ 
But 1 proceed with the possession of New Mex- 
ico, and show that it has been actual and continu- 
ous from the conquest of the country by [).)n 
Juan de Onate, in 1595, to the present time. That ; 
ancient actual possession lias already been shown 
at the starting point of the line— at El Paso del 
Norte. I will now show it to be the 3ame 
throughout the continuation of the line across the i 
Puerco and its valley, and at some point.s on the 
left bank of the Del Norte below El Paso. And [ 
first, of the Puerco river. It rises in theilatitude • 
of Santa Fc, and in its immediate neighborhood, 
only ten miles from it, and running south falls ' 
into the Rio del Norte, about three hundred miles ' 
on a straight line below El Paso, and has a valley 
of its own between the mountain range on the 
w^est, which divides it from the valley of the Del 
Norte, to which it is parallel, and the high arid ' 
table land on the east called El Llano Estacado — 
the Staked Plain — which divides it from the head- 
v/aters of the Red river, the Colorado, the Brasos, 
and other Texan streams. It is a long river, its 
head being in the latitude of Nashville — its mouth 
a degree and a half south of New Orleans. It 
washes the base of the high table land, and re- 
ceives no affluents, and has no valley on that side; 
on the west it has a valley, and many bold afflu- 
ents, coming down from the mountain range, (the 
Sierra Obscura, the Sierra Blanca, and the Sierra 
de los Organos,) which divides it from the valley 
of the upper Del Norte. It is valuable for its 
length, being a thousand miles, following its 
windings — from its course, which is north and 
south — from the quality of its water, derived from 
high mountains — from its valley, timbered and 
grassy, part prairie, good for cultivation, for pas- 
turage, and salt. It has two climates, cold in the 
north from its altitude (seven thousand feet) — mild 
in the south from its great descent, not less than 
five thousand feet, and with a general amelioration 
of climate over the valley of the Del Norte from 
its openness on the east and mountain shelter on 
the west. It is a river of New Mexico, and is 
so classified in geography. It is an old possession 
of New Mexico, and the most valuable part of it, 
and has many of her towns and villages upon it. 
Las Vegas, Gallinas, Tecolote Abajo, Cuesta, 
Pecos, San Miguel, Anton Calico, Salinas, Gran 
Gluivira, are all upon it. Some of these towns 
date their origin as far back as the first conquest 
of the Taos Indians, about the year 1600; and 
some have an historical interest, and a special re- 
lation to the question of title between New Mex- 
ico and Texas. Pecos is the old village of the 
Indians of that name, famous for the sacred fire 
so long kept burning there for the return of Monte- 
zuma. Gran duivira was a considerable mining 
town under the Spaniards before the year 1680, 
when it was broken up in the sreat Indian revolt 
of that year. Dr. Wislizenus thus speaks of it, 
(June, 1846:) 

" Within ttie last few yf>:ir> several AiiiericaiH and 
Freiiclimen have visited the place, and alihough they have 
not tound the reputed treasure, they certify at least in the 
existence of an aqueduct, about tf-u miles in lensih. to the 
still standing walls o!" several churches, the sculpture of the 
Spanish coat of arms, and t^ many r-nacious oits. supposed 



to bu Mlver mint!'. It wiu no doulil a dpaninh niiiiins 
town ; and it i- not unlikely thoi ii wn* d-iiroyed iiiH*^. 
ill till- ei'iuriil and 'uci'i-inrul iiHurn-ctinn of the Indiana ii> 
.N'cvv MivML-o a'.;uin''t ilu- Sp.ininrdi*." 

La-t Sniinu.s arc the salt lakes in the valley of 
the Puerco, about one hundred milcH aoutheaat 
from Sinta Fc, and where the peo|)le of New 
.Mexico have obtained their Halt from the setth-- 
mcnt of the country to the present day. Thi^ is 
what Dr. Wislizenus nays of these plu'.cs: 

"About four Uayif' trnvt-liiig (|ir<>l>ulily one hundred niili**^ 
.si)utli-40Uth):a.st of Santa Fr, an; Hiiine '-xienitivc nail Uke», 
or 'Salinas,' from which all the italt uM<-d In Nrw M'-xico in 
procureil. Largf caravans go there uvt:ry y»:ar fnin Santa 
Fe, in the dry xea-ton, and riMurii with asi uiiicli ax iliry can 



transporl. They excliannf, jemrally, on<: lin«lii'l of ^alt for 

.Hcll It for 
hiishel.' 



one of Indian corn, or : 



for one, and even two dollar' « 



Mr. President, I am u salt man ! I have an al- 
most mystical reverence for salt. It i.s the con- 
servative principle of nature. The life of man 
and beast requires it. God has bestowed it; and 
let all keep it, to whom he has given it. No tax- 
ing, or taking any people '-^ salt ! 

San Miguel, twenty miles from Santa Fe, is the 
place where the Texan expedition, under Colonel 
Cooke, were taken prisoners in 1841. 

To all these evidences of New Mexican posses 
sion of the Rio Puerco and its valley, is to bt 
added the further evidence resulting from acts of 
ownership in grants of land made upon its upper 
part, as in New Mexico, by the superior Spanish 
authorities before the revolution, and by the New 
Mexican local authorities since. The lower half 
was ungranted, and leaves much vacant land, and 
the best in the country, to the United States. 
The great pastoral landsof New Mexico are in the 
valley of the Puerco, where millions of sheep were 
formerly pastured, now reduced to about two hun 
dred thousand by the depredation of the Indians. 
The New Mexican inhabitants of the Del Norte 
send their flocks there to be herded by shepherds, 
on shares; and in this way, and by takin? 
their .<!alt there, and in addition to their towns and 
settlements, and grants of lands, the New Mexi- 
cans have had possession of the Puerco and its 
valley since the year 1600— that is to say, tor 
about one hundred years before the shipwreck of 
La Salle, in the bay of San Bernardo, revealed the 
name of Texas to Europe and America. 

These are the actual possessions of New Mex- 
ico on the Rio Puerco. On the Rio del Norte, as 
cut off by the committee's bill, there are, the little 
town of Frontera, ten miles above El Paso, a town 
begun opposite El Paso, San Eleazario, twenty 
miles below, and some houses lower down oppo- 
site El Presidiodel Norte Of all these,|San Eleazario 
is the most considerable, having a population of 
some four thousand souls, once a town of New Bis- 
cay, now of New Mexico, and now the property of 
the United States by avulsion. It is an island: and 
the main river, formerly on the north and now on 
the south of the island, leaves it in New Mexico: 
When Pike went through it, it was the most 
northern town, and the frontier garrison of New 
Biscay; and there the then lieutenant-governor 
of New .Mexico, who had ascorted him from El 
Paso, turned him over to the authorities of a new 
province. It is now the most southern town of 
New Mexico, without having changed its place, 
but the river which disappeared from its channel 
in that place, in 175Q, has now changed it to the 



10 



south of the island. Humboldt thus describes 1 
this phenomenon: i 

"The inhabilanis of the Paso di;l Norte have preserved ' 
the memory of a very extraordinary event which took place 
in the >ear"l752. They saw all at once the bed of the river 
dry thirty leagues above, and more than twenty leagues be 
(ow the Paso: the water of the river threw itself into a 
crevasse newly formed, and did notisjue again until near 
(he Presidio of San Eleazario. This loss of the Rio del Norte ; 
continued a considerable time. The beautiful fields which ; 
surround the Paso, and which are traversed by little canals 
of irrigation, remained without watering; the inhabitants ; 
dug wells in the sand with which tlie bed of the river is 
filled. Finally, after several weeks they saw the water take ' 
its ancient course, without doubt, because the crevasse and ! 
the subterranean conduits had filled themselves." — Essay 
on New Spai?i, vqI. 1, p. 304 

1 reiterate: I am not arguing title; I am only ; 
showing possession, which is a right to veinain m ' 
possession until title is decided. The argumeni 
of title has often been introduced into this question; 
&nd a letter from President Polk, through Secre- 
tary Buchanan, has often been read on the Texan 
side. Now, what 1 have to say of that letter, so 
frequently referred to, and considered so conclu- 
sive, is this: that, however potent it may have 
been in inducing annexation, or how much soever 
it may be entitled to consideration in fixing the 
amount to be paid to Texas for lier Mexican claim, 
yet as an evidence of title, I shoQld pay no more 
regard to it than to a chapter from the life and ad- 
ventures of Robinson Crusoe. Congress and the 
judiciary are the authorities to decide such claims 
to titles, and not Presidents and Secretaries. 

i rest upon the position, then, that the Rio 
Puerco, and its valley, is and was a New Mexican 
possession, as well as the left bank of the Del 
Norte, from above El Paso to below the mouth of 
the Puerco; and that this possession cannot be 
disturbed without raising the double question, first, 
of actual extension of slavery; and, secondly, of , 
the present legal existence of slavery in all New 
Mexico east of the Rio Grande, as a part of Texas. 
These are the questions which the proposed line of 
the committee raise, and force us to face. They 
ftse not questions of my seeking, but 1 shall not 
avoid them. It is not a new question with me, | 
this extension of slavery in that quarter. I met it 
in 1844, before the annexation of Texas. On the 
lOm day of June, of that year, and as part of a 
bill for a compact with Texas, and to settle all 
questions with her — the very ones which now 
perplex us — before she was annexed, 1 proposed, 
as article V. in the projected compact: 

Art. V. " The existence of slavery to be forever prohibi- 
ied in that part of the annexed territory which lies west of 
ne hundredth degree of longitude west from the meridian 
cf Greenwich." 

This is what I proposed six years ago, and as 
one in a series of propositions to be offered to 
Texas and Mexico for settling all questions grow- 
ing out of the projected annexation beforehand. 
Tney were not adopted. Immediate annexation, 
wuhoui regard to consequences, was the cry; and 
cM temperate counsels were set down to British 
Traitors, Abolitionists, and Whigs. Well! we 
have to regard consequences now — several con- 
eequences: one of which is this large extension of 
sf-very, which the report and conglomerate bills 
o;]the Committee of Thirteen force us to face. I 
did BO six years ago, and heardno outbreak against 
n;y opinions then. But iny opposition to the ex- 
tension of slavery dates further back than 1844 — 
^crty years further back; and as this is a suitable 



time for a general declaration, and a sort of gen- 
eral conscience delivery, i will say that my oppo- 
sition to it dates from 1804, when I was a student 
at law in the Stale of Tennessee, and studied the 
subject of African slavery in an American book — 
a Virginia book — Tucker's edition of Blackstone's 
Commentaries. And here it is, (holding up a vol- 
umeand reading from the title page:) '^Blackstone's 
Commentaries, icith notes of reference to the Constitu- 
tion and laics of the Federal Government of tht United 
States, and of the Ccmmonwealtli of Virginia, in Jive 
volumes, ivilh an appendix to each vokime containing 
short tracts, as appeared necessary to form a connected 
view of the laws of Virginia as a meinber of the Fed- 
eral Union. By St. George Thicker, Professor of Law 
in the University of William and Mary, and 'me of 
the Judges of the General Court in Virginia." In 
this American book — this Virginia edition of an 
English v/ork — I found my principles on the sub- 
ject of slavery. Among the short tracts in the 
appendixes is one of fifty pages in the appendix to 

' the first volume, second part, which treats of the 
subject of African slavery in the United States, 
with a total condemnation of the institution, and a 
plan for its extinction in Virginia. In that work 
— in that school — that old Virginia school which 
I was taught to reverence — I found my principles 
on slavery: and adhere to them. I concur in :he 
whole essay, except the remedy — gradual eman- 
cipation — and find in that remedy the danger which 
the wise men of Virginia then saw and di'eaded, 
but resolved to encounter, because it was to be- 
come worse with time: the danger to both races 
from so large an emancipation. The men of that 
day were uot enthusiasts or fanatics: they were 
statesmen and philosophers. They knew that the 
emancipation of the black slave was not a mere 
question between master and slave — not a question 
of property merely — but a question of white and 
black — between races; and what was to be the 
consequence to each race from a large emancipa- 
tion.* And there the wisdom, not the philanthropy, 
of Virginia balked fifty years ago; there the wis- 

; dom of America balks now. And here I find the 
largest objection to the extension of slavery — to 
planting it in new regions where it does not now 
exist — bestowing it on those who have it not. The 
incurability of the evil is the greatest objection to 
the extension of slavery. Ir. is wrong for the legis- 
lator to inflict an evil which can be cured: how 

I much more to inflict one that is incurable, and 

j against the will of the people who are to endure it 
forever ! I quarrel with no one for supposing sla- 
very a blessing: I deem it an evil: and would 
neither adopt it nor impose it on others. Yet I am 
a slaveholder, and among the few members of 
Congress who hold slaves in this District. The 
French proverb tells us that nothing is new but 
what has been forgotten. So of this objection to 
a large emancipation. Every one sees now that it 
is a question of races, involving consequences 
which go to the destruction of one or the other: it 
was seen fifty years ago, and the wisdom of Vir- 
ginia balked at it then. It seems to be above hu- 

* " It may be asked why no; retain the blacks among us, 
and incorporate them into liie ^taie. Deep-rooted prt judices 
entertained by the w^hites ; ten thousand recollections of the 
blacks of the" injuries ihey have sustained : new provoca- 
tions; the real distinctions which nature has made; and 
many other circumstanctH. will divide us into parties, and 
, pr duce convulsions, which will probably nevei end hut in 
■^ the extermination of one or the otiier race."— Jejfcison. 



11 



man wisdom. Bat there is a wisdom above human ! 
and to that we must look. In the mean time, not 
extend the evil. 

'•^In refusing to extend slavery into these seventy 
thousand square miles, 1 act in contormity not 
only to iny own long-established principles, but 
r'so in conformity to the lon^-esialilished practice 
of Congress. Five times iii four years did Con- 
gress refuse the prayer of Indiauii for a temporary 
suspension of the anti-siavery clause of the ordin- 
ance of '67. On the 2d of March, ia03, Mr. 
Randolph, of Roanoke, as chairman of the com- 
miitee to which the memorial praying the suspen- 
sion was referred, made a report against it, which 
was concurred in by the Hou.se. This is the re- 
port: 

■' rtiat Uic rapid pupulatioii of the .Stale ot'Oliio, sulHci- 
enliy CFiuees, in llie opinion of your comniitlec, that tlie labor 
oi" -laves is not necessary to p'ronion: tlic growth and scltlf;- 
rneni of colonics in thai region. Tli.it tliis labor, tJemon- 
sirably ttn; dearest of any, can only be employed to advan- 
tage ill itie cultivation of products more valuable than any 
Known to that quarter oi' tlie United States : that the eoiii- 
mictee deem il highly dangerous and inexpedient to impair 
a provision wisely calculated to promote the happiness and 
prospenty of the northwestern country, and to give strength 
and security to th^t e.vtensive frontier. In the salutary ope- 
ration of this sagacious and benevotent restraint, it is be- 
lieved that the inhabitanlj of Indiana will, at no very distant 
day. find ample remuneralion for a teiuporary privation of 
!arb4ir and of emigration." 

This report of Mr. Randolph was in 1803: the 
next year, March, 1804, a different report, on the 
same prayer, was made by a committee of which 
Mr. Rodney, of Delaware, was chairman. It re- 
commended a suspension of the anti-slavery clause 
for ten years: it was not concurred in by the 
House. Two years afterwards, February, 1806, 
a similar report, recnmmending suspension for ten 
years, was made by a committee of which Mr. Gar- 
nett, of Virginia, was chairman: it met the same 
fate — non-concurrence. The next year, 1807, both 
Houses were tried. In February of that year, a 
committee of the House, of which Mr. Parke was 
csairman, reported in favorof the indefinite suspen- 
sion of the clause: the report was not concurred in. 
And in November of that year, Mr. Franklin, of 
North Carolina, as chairman of a committee of 
the Senate, made a report against the suspension, 
which was concurred in by the Senate, and unani- 
mously, as it would seem from the Journal, there 
oeing no division called for. Thus, five times in 
four years, the respective Houses of Congress 
refused to admit even a temporary extension, or 
rather reiixtension of slavery into fndiana terri- 
tory, which had been before the ordinance of '87 a 
slave territory, holding many slaves at Vincennes. 
Tne.se five refusals to suspend the ordinance of 
87, were so many confirmations of it. All the 
rest of the action of Congress on the subject, was 
to the same effect or stronger. The Missouri com- 
promise line was a curtailment of slave territory, 
the Texas annexation resolutions were the .same; 
the ordinance of '87 itself, so often confirmed by 
Congress, was a curtailment of slave territory — in 
fact its actual abolition; for it is certain that slavery 
existed in fact in the French settlements of the 
Illinois at that time; and that the oidinance term- 
inated it. I act then in conformity to the long, 
u.aiformly established policy of Congress, as well 
as m conformity to my own principles, in refusing 
to vole the extension of slavery, which tfie com- 
raittee'e line would involve. 



'^ And here, tt does seem to me that we, of the 
present day, mistake me point of the true objec- 
I tion to the extension of slavery. We look at it us it 
concerns the ligius, or interests, of the inhabitants 
of the States I iind not as it may cone.ern the people 
to whom it IS to iic given I and to whom it^is to be 
an irrevocable gift — to them, and posterity ! Mr. 
Ilundolph'a report, in the case of Indiana, look 
the true ground. It looked to the interest of the 
people to whom ihc .shivery was to go, and refused 
them an evil,ulthou2h they oegged for it. 

I return to the point — the 70,000 square milea 
1 of territory which the committee's fine would 
transfer from the possession of New Mexico to the 
, po.ssession of Texas — and the question of the ex- 
tension of slavery which grows out of that trans- 
I fer. There is no slavery on it now, either in law 
I or in fact. It will be there by law if tlie transfer is 
' made. This leaves open but one question, and 
1 that is, can climate be relied upon to keep it away ? 
i I think not There are two climates in New 
j .Mexico — one frigid, the other temperate; and these 
i 70,000 square miles are in the temnerate part. It 
is a long province, stretching north and south, 
j high and mountainous in the north — lower, and 
i with broader valley lower down. Santa Fe has 
an elevation of 7, '250 feet. El Paso 3,800. The 
Rio del Norte is called in tiie upper part of its 
course the river above, (Rio Arriva;) in the lower 
part, river below (Rio Abajo;) and the climate 
corresponds with this structure of the country — 
rigorous at Santa Fe, mild at El Paso. Humboldt 
thus speaks of them: 

'■ New Me.xico, tliougn placed under the same latitude with 
Syria and Central Persia, ha:^ a climate emineiilly cold. It 
freezes there in the middle of the month of .May, near to 
Santa Fe, and a little further north (under Uie parallel of 
the Morea) the Uio del Norte is covered soinclimes several 
years in succession with ice so thick that horses and car- 
riages pass on it. We do not know the eInvaUon of the 
country in New Me.vico ; hut I doubt whether, uuder the 
37° of latitude, the bed of the river may liavi, more than 
seven or tight hundred metres of elevation above the level 
of the sea. The mountains whicii border the valley of the 
Del Norte, even those ai the fool of which is placed the vil- 
lage of Taos, lose theirsnow already towards ihe commence 
ment of the month C' Juue." — P'ol. I, p. 3'>2. 

" The environs of El Paso are a delicious country, which 
resemble the most beautiful parts of .\ndalusia. The fields 
are cultivated in corn and wheat. The vineyards produce 
e.xcellent wines, which are preferred even to the wines of 
Parras and of New Biscay. The gardens contain, in abund- 
ance, all the fruit trees of Europe — tigs, peaches, pome- 
granates, and pears." — Vol. \,p. :J06. 

Humboldt is right, and recent travellers confirm 

now what he wrote in 1804. It was at the head 

of the valley of the Del Norte, some three degrees 

north of Santa Fc, that Colonel F'remont sutVered 

his great disaster — had to struggle through snows 

I above the heads of men and horses, and found i' a 

relief to tread the river, solid with ice, for a road. 

i At Santa Fe, the 20lh of February, he found it 

I winter; eight days at"terwards, on the Ri •• Abajo, 

; halfway to EI Paso, and having descended two 

, thousand six hundred feet, and still one thousand 

: two hundred feet above the level of El Paso, he 

fou. d it spring — the farmers ploughing and seed- 

; ing, the early fruit trees in bloom, and the air so 

I mild that he camped out of nights, and without 

! tents, though in a settled and hospitable country. 

Here, then, are two climates in New Mexico — 

j one a barrier against the introduction of African 

I slavery, the other not; and it i." that part which is 

i no: a barrier that is proposed to be iransferred t<x 



12 



Texas. This applies to tne Del None and its 
valley: it is still more true of the Puerco and its 
valley. Rising in the latitude, and at the eieva 
tion of Santa Fe, it descends below the latitude, 
and below the elevation of El Paso, and is miider 
in its climate throughout, because more open to 
the east, and sheltered on the west by a long; and 
lofty range of mountains. Its more genial climate 
makes it, as I have said, the bucolic region of New 
Mexico, to which the inhabitants of the banks of 
the Del Norte send their flocks to find their own 
food, and live without shelter, the year round. 
And it is precisely the southern half of this river 
and valley, reaching a degree a; d a half south of 
New Orleans, and without sufficient altitude to 
counteract the effect of southern latitude, that the 
committee's bill would transfer this large district 
froni the possession of New Mexico to the pos- 
session of Texas. Climate there can be no bar 
to the introduction of slavery; and thus its actual 
extension into that quarter becomes the question 
■which the committee's bill forces us to face — and 
which I have faced ! 

The committee's line has the further ill conse- 
quence of raising the question of the existence of 
slavery by law in the Santa Fe part even of New 
Mexico. If theirline is a cotnp-omise of the Texas 
claim, it admits the right and sovereignty of Texas 
both above and below, and will involve members 
in an inconvenient vote — the consequence of which 
is readily seen. 

This is a consequence which the committee's 
bill involves, and from which there is no escape 
but in the total rejection of their plan, and the 
adoption of the line which I propose — the longi- 
tudinal line of 102 — which, corresponding with 
ancient title and actual possession, avoids the 
question of slavery in either country; which, leav- 
ing the population of each untouched, disturbs no 
interest, and which, in splitting the high sterile ta- 
ble land of the Staked Plain, conforms to the nat- 
ural division of the country, and leaves to each a 
natural frontier, and an ample extend of compact 
and homogeneous territory. To Texas is left all 
the territory drained by all the rivers which have 
their mouths within her limits, whether those 
mouths are in the Gulf of Mexico, the Mississippi, 
or the Rio Grande: lo New Mexico is left the 
whole course of the Rio Puerco and all its valley; 
and which, added to the valley of the Del Norte, 
will make a State of the first class in point of ter- 
ritory, susceptible of large population and wealth, 
and in a compact form capable of defence against 
Indians. The Staked Plain is the natural frontier 
of both countries. It is a dividing wall between 
system.s of waters and systems of countries. It is 
a high sterile plain, some sixty miles wide upon 
some five hundred long, running north and south, 
its western declivity abrupt and washed by the 
Puerco at its base: its eastern broken into chasms 
— canones — from which issue the myriad of little 
streams which, flowing towards the rising sun, 
form the great rivers — Red river, Brasos, Color- 
ado, Nueces, which find their outlet in the Missis- 
sippi or in the Gulf of Mexico. It is a salient 
feature in North American geography — a table of 
land sixty miles wide, five hundred long, and some 
thousands feet above the level of the sea — and 
sterile, level, without a j'r.rvib. a plant, or grass, 
and presenting to the traveler a h.^/rizon of its own 
like the ocean. Without a landmark to guide the 



steps of the traveler across it, the early hunters 
and herdsmen of New Mexico staked their course 
across it; and hence its name, El Llano Estacado — 
the Staked Plain. It is a natural frontier between 
New Mexico and Texas; and for such a line, qui- 
eting all questions between them, all with the 
United States, yielding near two hundred thousand 
square miles of territory to the United States, and 
putting into her hands the means of populating and 
defending New Mexico by giving lands to settlers 
and defenders — I am ready to vote the fifteen mil- 
lions which my bill fairly and openly proposes. 
For the line in this bill I would not give a copper. 
But it would be a great error to suppose I would 
give fifteen millions for the territory in dispute be- 
tween New Mexico and Texas. That disputed 
territory is only a small part of what the Texan 
cession would be. It would embrace four degrees 
of latitude on the north of Texas, and a front of a 
thousand miles on the Arkansas, and would give 
to the United States territory indispensable to her — 
lo the population and defence both of New Mex- 
ico and Utah, in front of both which this part of 
Texas lies. 

The committee, in their report, and the Senator 
ff-MTc: Kentucky, [Mi. Clay,] in his speech, are im- 
pressive isi'their representations in favor of givmg 
governme;its to New Mexico and the remaining 
part of Caitfornia. I join them in all they sayia 
favor of the necessity of these governments, and 
the duty of Congress to give them. I mean terri- 
torial governments, and would not vote for State 
governments in either of them, even if they sent 
constitutions here. I do not deem them ripe for 
such governments; they are too young and weak 
for that. They are in our hands, and upon oar 
hands, and belong to us; and it is our duty to pro- 
vide for them, and take care of them, until they 
are strong enough to take care of themselves as 
sovereign States. Both territories require govern- 
ment at our hands, and protection along with it; 
New Mexico especially, now desolated by Indian 
ravages, and suffering more in the three years that 
she has belonged to the United States than in any 
three years of her existence — even during the most 
helpless period of the Mexican rule. The Spanish 
Government, under the vice-regal system, appro- 
priated two thousand dragoons to the protection of 
the internal provinces from the Apaches, the Nav- 
ahoes, the Cumanchcs, and other wild Indians. 
We have a fev/ companies of dragoons and some 
stationary intantry, in sight of whose barracks 
these Indians slay men and women, carry off" 
children, and drive away flocks and herds, some- 
times thousands in a drove. The Navahoes actu- 
ally have more New Mexican sheep now than the 
New Mexicans have left. A single individual in- 
habitant of El Paso owned more cattle and sheep 
when Pike was there in 1806 than the whole town 
and settlement now own. Single inhabitants of 
the valley of the Del Norte owned flocks and herds 
then nearly equal to those of the whole ,)rovince 
now. The ualley of Puerco, then the sheep-walk 
of millions, is now reduced to some two hundred 
thousand, and becoming less every day. All this 
is a reproach to us. It is a reproach to republican 
government in our persons. It is an appeal to us 
for succor and protection, to which we cannot be 
deaf without drawing down upon our heads the 
censure of all good men. But this bill is not the 
way to give it. These governments are balked by 



18 



being put into this bill. They not only impede I 
Cnlitbrnin, but themselves. The conjunction is an • 
injury to bom. Tney mutually delay and endan- 
ger each other. And it is no argument in t'avor of 
the conjunction to say that the establishment of a , 
government for New Mexico requires the orevious 
settlement ot" her eastern boundary with Texus. ' 
That IS no argument tor lucknig Texas, with all her 
multit'arious questions, even to New Mexico, much 
less to California. It is indeed very desirable to set- 
tle that boundary, and to settle it at once, and for- ; 
ever ; but it is not an indispen.-^.ibility to the crea- ; 
tion of a government for New Mexico. We have 
a right to a government according to iier posses- 
sion; and that we can give her, to continue till the 
question of title is deciued. The ull poss'uktis — ;\s 
you possess — is the principle to govern our legis- 
lation — the principle which gives tlie po.ssessor 
a riicht to the possession until the question of title 
is decided. This principle is the same both in 
national and municipal law — both in the case of 
citizens or communities of the same government, 
and between independent nations. The mode of 
decision only is different. Between independent 
nations it is done by negotiation or by arms: ije- 
tween citizens or communities of the same gov- 
ernment, it is done by law. Independent nations 
may invade ami fight each other for a boundary: 
citizens or communities of the same government 
cannot. And the party that shall attempt it commits 
a violation of law and order; and the government 
which permits such violation is derelict of its duty. 
I have now examined, so far as I propose to do 
it on a motion for indefinite postponement, the 
three bills which the committee have tacked to- 
gether — the California, Utah, New Mexico and 
Texas bills. There are two other bills which I 
have not mentioned, because they are not tacked, 
but only hung on ; but which belong to the sys- 
tem, as it is called, and, without some mention of 
whicli, injustice v.'ould be done to the commitee 
in the presentation of their scheme. The fugitive 
slave recovery bill, and the District of Columbia 
slave trade suppression bill, are parts of the sys- 
tem of measui'es which the committee propose, 
and which, taken together, are to constitute a 
compromise, and to terminate forever and most 
fraternally all the dissensions of the slavery agita- 
tion in the United States. They apply to two 
out of the five gaping wounds whicli the Senator 
from Kentucky enumerated on the five fingers of 
his lel't hand, and for healing up all which at once 
he had provided one large piaster, big enough to 
cover all, and efiicacious enough to cure all ; while 
the President only proposed to cure one, and that 
with a little plaster, and ii of no efiicacy. I do 
not propose to examine these two attendant or se- 
quacious bills, which dangle at the tail of the 
other three. I will not go into them, nor mentioii 
them further than to suy, that the alternative in 
the report to pay the owner out of the federal 
treasury for the loss of irrecoverable slaves, 
might admit, in practice, of abolition in the States 
by the legislation of Congress and the purse of 
the nation ; and to suppress the slave trade in this 
District as a concession for abstaining from the a- 
boliiion of slavery in this District, as expressed 
in the report, page 17, is to make cmcession of 
something valuable, for an abstinence which we 
have had for sixty years without concession, and 
are still to have on the same terms. 



This is the end of the commiitee'H labor — five 
old billa gathered up from our table, tacked to- 
gether, and clinstened a compromise ! Now com- 
promise is a pretty phrase at all times, and is a 
good thing in itself, when there happens to be 
any parties to moke it, any auihoiity to enforce 
it, any penalties for breaking it, or anything to be 
compromise.!. The compromises of the Constitu- 
tion are uf that kind; and they stand, l^ompro- 
mises made in court, and entcre«l of record, arc of 
tliat Kind; and iliey stand. Compromii-es made 
by individuals on claims to |)roperiy arn likewise 
f)flhat character; and they suuid. I respect all 
such cumpromises. But where there hapjicns to 
be nothing to be compromised, no partiea to make 
a compromise, no power to enforce it, no penalty 
for its breach, no obligation on any one — not even 
its makers — to obsserve it, and when no two human 
beings ail. agree about its meaning, then a com- 
promise becomes ridiculous and pestift-rous. 1 
have no respect for it, and e.schew it. It cannot 
stand, and will fall; and in its fall will raise up 
more ills than it was intended to cure. And of 
this character I deem this farrago of incongruous 
mutter to be, wbich has been gathered up and 
stuck together, and offered to us '-all or none," 
like "fifty-four forty." It has none of the requi- 
sites of a compromise, and the name cannot make 
It so. 

In the first place, there are no parties to niake a 
compromise. We are not in Convention, but in 
Congress; and 1 do not admit a geographical di- 
vision of parties in this Chamber, although the 
Committee or Thirteen was formed upon that prin- 
ciple — six from tiie South, half a dozen from the 
North, and one froui the borders of both — .litimg 
on a ridge pole," to keep the balance even. I recog- 
nize 110 such parties, i know no North, and 1 
know no South; and 1 repulse and rep'udiate, us a 
thing to be forever condemned, tliis first attempt to 
establish geographical parties in this Chamber, by 
creating a committee formed upon that principle. 
In the next place, tliere is no sanction for any such 
coinpromise — no authority to enlbrce it — none to 
punish Us violation. In the li.iid place, there is 
nothing to be compromised. A compromise is a 
concession, a mutual concession of comesitd claims 
between two pariits. i know ol' nothing to be 
conceded on the part of the slavehoiding States in 
regard to their slave property. Their rights are 
independent of the Federal Government, and ad- 
mitted in the Constitution — a right to hold tbeir 
slaves as ;»o^er<j/, a right to pursue and recover 
them as properly, a righc to it as a political element 
in the weight of tnese States, by making five count 
three in the national representation. These are 
our rights by an instrument which we are l>ound 
to respect, and I will concede none of them, nor 
purchase any of them. I never purchase as aeon- 
cession wiiat I hold as a right, nor acctpt an infe- 
rior title when i already hoJd the highest. Even 



* A very oritii-.il (losiiioii, ,ml rtiquifiiig a most nice ad- 
justment orhalaiic<^ to keep iti<; weight from (ailing on erne 
side, or the other— sonietlnng lilie tliat of the Roman nnpe- 
ror, in his apotheosis, who was required lo :-i.\ iiiuiself ex- 
actly ill the inidilli; of ihr heaven-, lest, by It^aniug to one 
side, or tht other, he might overset Uu; universe. 
•' Press not too much on any [mui the splitic, 
Hard were the task lliy weight divine to bear! 
O'er the mitt orb more equal shalt Uiou rise, 
And -.vii!) a juster tutlaiice dx the skitK."— iue<i«. 



14 



if this congeries of bills was a compromise, in fact, 
I should be opposed to it, for the reasons stated. 
But the fact itself is to me apocryphal. What is it 
but the case of five old bills introduced by different 
members as common legislative measures — caught 
up by the Senator from Kentucky, and his com- 
mittee, bundled together, and then called a com- j 
promise! Now, this mystifies nie. The same 
bills were ordinary legislation in the hands of their 
authors; they become a sacred compromise in the 
hands of their new possessors. They seemed to 
be of no account as laws: they become a national 
panacea as a compromise. The difference seems 
to be in the change of name. The poet tells us 
that a rose will smell as sweet by any other name. 
That may be true of roses, hut not of compro- 
mises. In the case of the compromise, the whole 
smell is in the name; and here is the proof. The 
Senator from Illinois [Mr. Douglas] brought in 
three of these bills: they emitted no smell. The 
Senator from Virginia [Mr. Mason] brought in 
another of them — no smell in that. The Senator 
from Missouri, who now speaks to the Senate, 
brought in the fifth— di«o, no smel! about it. The 
olfactory nerve of the nation never scented their 
existence. But no sooner are they jumbled to- 
gether, and called a compromise, than the nation 
is filled with their perfume. People smell it all 
over the land, and, like the inhalers of certain 
drugs, become frantic for the thing. This mysti- 
fies me, and the nearest that I can come to a solu- 
tion of the mystery is in the case of the two Dr. 
Townsend's and their sarsapariila root. They 
both extract from the same root, but the extract is 
a totally different article in the hands of the two 
doctors. Produced by one, it is a universal pana- r, 
cea: by the other, it is of no account, and little 
less than poison. Here is what the Old Doctor 
says of this strange difference: 

" We wish it understood, because it is the absolute truili, 
that S. P. Tovvnseiid'.* article and Old Dr. Jacob Townsend's 
Sarsapariila are heaven-iuiile apart, and infinileh/ dissimilar ; 
that they are unlike in every particular, havins not one sin- 
gle thing in common.'" 

And accounts for the difference thus: 
" The sarsapariila roo!. it is well known to medical men, 
contains many medicinal properties, and some properties 
which are inert or useless, and others which, it retained in 
preparing it for use, produce fermentation and add, which 
is injurious to the system. Some of the properties of sarsa- 
pariila are so volatile that they entirely evaporate, and are 
lost in the preparation, if they are not preserved by a scien- 
tific process, known only lo the experienced in its manufac- 
ture. Moreover, those volatile jrrinciples, w hich fly off in 
vapor, or as an exhalation, under heat, are the veiy essential 
medical properties of the root, which give lo it all its value." 

Now, all this is perfectly intelligible to me. I 
understand it exactly. It shows ine precisely how 
the same root is either to be a poison or a medi- 
cine, as it happens to be in the hands of the old or 
the young doctor. This may be the case with 
these bills. To me it looks like a clue to the mys- 
tery; but I decide nothing, and wait patiently for 
the solution which the Senator from Kentucky 
may give when he ciimes to answer this part of 
my speech. The old doctor winds up in requir- 
ing particular attention to his name labelled on the 
bottle, to wit, "Old Doctor Jacob Townsend," 
and not Young Doctor Samuel Townsend. This 
shows that there is virtue in a name when applied 
to the extract of sarsaparilla-root; and there may 
be equal virtue in it when applied to a conapro- 
niise bill. If so. it may show how these self-same 



bills are of no force or virtue in the hands of the 
young Senator from Illinois, [Mr. Douglas,] and 
become omnipotently efficacious in the hands of 
the old Senator from Kentucky. 

This is the end of the grand committee's work 
— five old bills tacked together, and presented as a 
remedy for evils which have no existence, and re- 
quired to be accepted under a penalty — the penal- 
ty of being gazetted as enemies of compromise, 
and played at by the organs! The old one, to be 
sure, is dreadfully out of tune — the strings all 
broken and the screws all loose, and discoursing 
most woful music, and still requiring us to dance 
to it I And such dancing it would be ! — nothing 
but turn round, cross over, set-to, and back out! 
Sir, there was once a musician — we have all read 
of him — who had power with his lyre (but his in- 
strument was spelt 1 y re) — not only over men, 
but ver wild beasts also, and even over stones, 
whi 2c he could make dance into their places when 
the walls of Ilion were to be built. But our old 
organist was none of that sort, even in his best 
day; and since the injury to his instrument in 
playing the grand national symphony of the four 
f'g — the fifty-four forty or fight — it is so out of 
tune that its music will be much more apt to scare 
off lame men than to charm wild beasts or stones. 
No, sir! no more slavery compromises. Stick 
to those we have in the Constitution, and they 
will be stuck to! Look at the four votes — those 
four on the propositions which I submitted. No 
abolition of slavery in the States: none in the forts, 
arsenals, navy yards and dock yards: none in the 
i District of Columbia: no interference with the 
slave trade between the States. These are the 
votes given on this floor, and which are above all 
Congress compromises, because they abide the 
compromises of the Constitution. 

The committee, besides the ordinary purpose 
of legislation, that of making laws for the govern- 
ment of the people, propose another object of a 
different kind, that of acting the part of nationai 
benefactors, and giving peace and happiness to a 
miserable and distracted people — innuendo, the 
people of the United States. They propose this 
object as the grand result and crowning mercy of 
their multifarious labors. The gravity with vvhicSi 
the chairman of the committee has brought for- 
ward this object in his report, and the pathetic 
manner in wiiich he has enforced it in his speech, 
and the exact enumeration he has made of the 
public calamities upon his fingers' ends, preclude 
the idea, as 1 have heretofore intimated, of anv 
intentional joke to be practised upon us by that 
distinguished Senator: otherwise I might have 
been tempted to 'oelieve that the eminent Senator, 
unbending frorn his .<erious occupations, had con- 
descended to amuse himself at our expense. Cer- 
tain it is that the conception of this restoration of 
peace and happiness is most jocose. In the first 
place, there is no contention to be reconciled, no 
distraction to be composed, no misery to be as- 
suaged, no lost harmony to be restored, no lost hap- 
piness to be recovered! And, if there was, the com- 
mittee is not tlie party to give us these blessings. 
Their example and precept do not agree. They 
preach concord, and practice discord. They rec- 
ommend harmony to others, and disagree among 
themselves. They propose the fraternal kiss to 
us, and give themselves rude rebuffs. They set 
us a sad example. Scarcely is the healing report 



15 



read, and the anodyne bills, or pills, laid on our 
tables, than fierce contention breaks out in the 
ranks of the committee itself. They attack each 
other. They sive and take fierce licks. The 
great peace-maker himself fares !)adly — stuck all 
over with arrows, like the man on the first leaf of j 
the almanac. Here, in our presence, in the very | 
act of consummatina; the marriaje of California i 
with Utah, New Mexico, Texas, the fu2;acious 
slaves of the States, and the marketable slaves of 
this District— in this very act of consummation, 
as in a certain wedding feast of old, the feast he- 
comes a fi^ht — the festival a combat — and the 
amiable guests pummel each other. 

When his committee was formed, and himself 
safely installed at the head of it, conqueror and 
pacificator, the Senator from Kentucky appeared 
to be the happiest of mankind. We all remember 
that night. He seemed to ache with pleasure. It 
was too great for continence. It burst forth. In 
the fulness of his joy, and the overflowing of his 
heart, he entered upon that series of congratula- 
tions which we all remember so well, and which 
seemed to me to be rather premature, and in disre- 
gard of the sage maxim which admonishes the 
traveler never to halloo till he is out of the woods. 
I thought so then. I was forcibly reminded of it 
on Saturday last, when I saw that Senator, after 
vain efforts to compose his friends, and even re- 
minding them of what they were "threatened" 
with this day — innuendo, this poor speech of mine 
— gather up his beaver and quit the chamber, in a 
way that seemed to say, the Lord have mercy 
upon you all, for I am done with yon ! But the 
Senator was happy that night — supremely so. All! 
his plans had succeeeded — Committee of Thirteen I 
appointed — he himself its chairman — all power; 
put Into their hands — their own hands untied, and 
the hands of the Senate tied — and the iiarnps just 



ready to be bound together forever. It was aa 
ecstatic moment for the Senator, something like 
that of the heroic Pirithous when he surveyed the 
preparations for the nuptial feast — .saw the com- 
pany all present, the lapithas on couches, the 
centaurs on their haunches — heard the lo hymen 
beginning to resound, and saw the beauteous Hip- 
podamia, about as beauteous I suppose as Califor- 
nia, come "glittering like a star," and take her 
stand on his left hand. It was a happy moment 
for Pirithous! and in the fulness of his feelings he 
mio'ht have given vent to his joy in congratulations 
to all the company present, to all the lapithse and 
to all the centaurs, to all mankind, and to all horse- 
kind, on the auspicious event. But, oh! the de- 
ceitfulness of human felicity ! In an instant the 
scene was changed ! the feast a fight — the wedding 
festival a mortal combat — the table itself supplying 
the implements of war! 

"At first a medley flight 
Of howls and jars supply the fight : 
Once impleinenis of feasts, but now of fate." 

You know how it ended. Tlie fight broke up 
the feast. Tiie wedding was postponed. And so 
may it be with this attempted conjunction of Cali- 
fornia with the many ill-suited spouses which tiie 
Committee of Thirteen have provided for her. 

Mr. President, it is time to be done with this 
comedy of errors. California is suffering for want 
of admission. New Mexico is suffering for want 
of protection. The public business is suffering 
for want of attention. The character of Congress 
is suffering for want of progress in business. It 
is time to put an end to so many evils; and I have 
made the motion intended to terminate them, by 
moving the indefinite postponement of this un- 
manageable mass of incongruous bills, each an 
j impediment to the other, that they may be taken 
up one by one, in their proper order, to receive 
the decision which rheir respective merits requ'ire. 



LIBRftRY OF CONGRESS 



011 898 058 P 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



III lllllllllillllllllllilllll II llllj lull III I I 

011 898 058 A 



